linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Cc: "DRI Development" <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"Intel Graphics Development" <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Linux MM" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Michal Hocko" <mhocko@suse.com>,
	"Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
	"David Rientjes" <rientjes@google.com>,
	"Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	"Daniel Vetter" <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] mm: Check if mmu notifier callbacks are allowed to fail
Date: Tue, 21 May 2019 11:44:11 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190521154411.GD3836@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190520213945.17046-1-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>

On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 11:39:42PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> Just a bit of paranoia, since if we start pushing this deep into
> callchains it's hard to spot all places where an mmu notifier
> implementation might fail when it's not allowed to.
> 
> Inspired by some confusion we had discussing i915 mmu notifiers and
> whether we could use the newly-introduced return value to handle some
> corner cases. Until we realized that these are only for when a task
> has been killed by the oom reaper.
> 
> An alternative approach would be to split the callback into two
> versions, one with the int return value, and the other with void
> return value like in older kernels. But that's a lot more churn for
> fairly little gain I think.
> 
> Summary from the m-l discussion on why we want something at warning
> level: This allows automated tooling in CI to catch bugs without
> humans having to look at everything. If we just upgrade the existing
> pr_info to a pr_warn, then we'll have false positives. And as-is, no
> one will ever spot the problem since it's lost in the massive amounts
> of overall dmesg noise.
> 
> v2: Drop the full WARN_ON backtrace in favour of just a pr_warn for
> the problematic case (Michal Hocko).
> 
> v3: Rebase on top of Glisse's arg rework.
> 
> v4: More rebase on top of Glisse reworking everything.
> 
> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
> Cc: "Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>
> Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> Cc: "Jérôme Glisse" <jglisse@redhat.com>
> Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org
> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
> Reviewed-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>

Reviewed-by: Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>

> ---
>  mm/mmu_notifier.c | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/mmu_notifier.c b/mm/mmu_notifier.c
> index ee36068077b6..c05e406a7cd7 100644
> --- a/mm/mmu_notifier.c
> +++ b/mm/mmu_notifier.c
> @@ -181,6 +181,9 @@ int __mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start(struct mmu_notifier_range *range)
>  				pr_info("%pS callback failed with %d in %sblockable context.\n",
>  					mn->ops->invalidate_range_start, _ret,
>  					!mmu_notifier_range_blockable(range) ? "non-" : "");
> +				if (!mmu_notifier_range_blockable(range))
> +					pr_warn("%pS callback failure not allowed\n",
> +						mn->ops->invalidate_range_start);
>  				ret = _ret;
>  			}
>  		}
> -- 
> 2.20.1
> 


  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-05-21 15:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-20 21:39 Daniel Vetter
2019-05-20 21:39 ` [PATCH 2/4] kernel.h: Add non_block_start/end() Daniel Vetter
2019-05-21 14:47   ` [PATCH] " Daniel Vetter
2019-05-20 21:39 ` [PATCH 3/4] mm, notifier: Catch sleeping/blocking for !blockable Daniel Vetter
2019-05-21 15:32   ` Jerome Glisse
2019-05-20 21:39 ` [PATCH 4/4] mm, notifier: Add a lockdep map for invalidate_range_start Daniel Vetter
2019-05-21 15:40   ` Jerome Glisse
2019-05-21 16:00     ` Daniel Vetter
2019-05-21 16:32       ` Jerome Glisse
2019-05-21 15:44 ` Jerome Glisse [this message]
2019-06-18 15:22   ` [PATCH 1/4] mm: Check if mmu notifier callbacks are allowed to fail Daniel Vetter
2019-06-19 16:50     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-06-19 19:57       ` Daniel Vetter
2019-06-19 20:13         ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-06-19 20:18           ` Daniel Vetter
2019-06-19 20:42             ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-06-19 21:20               ` Daniel Vetter
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2018-12-10 10:36 [PATCH 0/4] mmu notifier debug checks v2 Daniel Vetter
2018-12-10 10:36 ` [PATCH 1/4] mm: Check if mmu notifier callbacks are allowed to fail Daniel Vetter
2018-12-10 10:44   ` Koenig, Christian
2018-12-10 13:27   ` Michal Hocko

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20190521154411.GD3836@redhat.com \
    --to=jglisse@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
    --cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=daniel.vetter@intel.com \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox